Corporate Rare Earth Rush: USA Rare Earth’s $2.8B Acquisition Exposes Global Mineral Colonialism & Supply Chain Vulnerabilities

The acquisition ignores the deep cultural and spiritual significance of the Cerrado and Amazon regions in Brazil, where rare earth deposits overlap with Indigenous territories like the Kayapó and Xavante lands. Traditional knowledge systems, which have long warned against the destructive impacts of industrial mining, are systematically excluded from decision-making processes, despite evidence that Indigenous-led conservation models could mitigate biodiversity loss. The lack of Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) under international law further underscores the colonial nature of this transaction, treating land as a commodity rather than a living ecosystem.

Rare earth extraction in Brazil traces back to colonial-era gold rushes, where Portuguese elites exploited enslaved labor and Indigenous knowledge to extract minerals, a pattern that persists today in the form of corporate neo-extractionism. The Serra Verde Group’s acquisition by USA Rare Earth mirrors 19th-century railroad concessions granted to foreign firms, which extracted wealth while leaving local infrastructure in ruin. The U.S. itself has a history of rare earth dependence, from the Mountain Pass Mine’s 1950s boom to its 2010s collapse due to Chinese competition, revealing a cyclical pattern of boom-bust extraction driven by geopolitical rather than ecological or social considerations.

In Vietnam, the state has nationalized rare earth production under the 'socialist market economy' model, prioritizing domestic processing over export, which has reduced environmental harm but also centralized power in state-owned enterprises. Mongolia’s Oyu Tolgoi mine, majority-owned by Rio Tinto, has sparked protests over water depletion and profit-sharing, highlighting how even 'progressive' state-led models can replicate extractive logics when marginalized voices are excluded. Meanwhile, in Greenland, Inuit communities have successfully blocked uranium and rare earth mining projects, demonstrating that Indigenous sovereignty can serve as a bulwark against corporate extraction when backed by legal and international support.

Rare earth elements are not 'rare' but are concentrated in ores at low grades, requiring massive energy inputs for extraction and processing, which often relies on sulfuric acid leaching—a process linked to soil and water contamination. The U.S. Geological Survey estimates that recycling and urban mining could supply up to 30% of rare earth demand by 2035, yet corporate models prioritize primary extraction due to higher short-term profits. Life-cycle assessments show that the carbon footprint of rare earth mining in Brazil is 2-3x higher than in China due to weaker environmental regulations, contradicting the narrative of 'clean' reshoring.

Artists like Brazilian photographer Sebastião Salgado have documented the devastation of mining in the Amazon, framing it as a violation of the 'living river' principle central to Indigenous cosmologies. In Andean traditions, minerals are considered 'living beings' with agency, a perspective that clashes with the Western commodification of rare earths as mere inputs for technology. The acquisition’s framing as a 'strategic' move ignores the spiritual cost of severing these connections, where land is not a resource but a relative whose suffering is felt across generations.

Scenario modeling by the International Energy Agency suggests that without a shift to circular economies, rare earth demand could outpace supply by 2040, exacerbating geopolitical tensions and environmental degradation. Alternative futures include 'mineral sovereignty' models where communities control extraction, as seen in Ecuador’s 2021 constitutional recognition of nature’s rights, or 'degrowth' approaches that reduce reliance on rare earths through innovation in material science. The current acquisition locks in a high-emission, high-waste pathway, ignoring the potential of bio-mining or algae-based extraction methods that could reduce environmental impact by 90%.

The deal’s beneficiaries are shareholders, executives, and Western governments, while the harms—water pollution, land displacement, and health crises—are disproportionately borne by Afro-Brazilian quilombola communities and Indigenous groups. Women in mining regions face heightened risks of gender-based violence due to the influx of male laborers, yet their perspectives are entirely absent from corporate narratives. Labor unions in Brazil have warned that Serra Verde’s acquisition could lead to mass layoffs and precarious working conditions, further marginalizing workers in an already exploitative industry.